Perceptual training profoundly alters binocular rivalry through both sensory and attentional enhancements

Abstract

The effects of attention, as well as its functional utility, are particularly prominent when selecting among multiple stimuli that compete for processing resources. However, existing studies have found that binocular rivalry-a phenomenon characterized by perceptual competition between incompatible stimuli presented to the two eyes-is only modestly influenced by selective attention. Here, we demonstrate that the relative resistance of binocular rivalry to selective modulations gradually erodes over the course of extended perceptual training that uses a demanding, featurebased attentional task. The final result was a dramatic alteration in binocular rivalry dynamics, leading to profound predominance of the trained stimulus. In some cases, trained observers saw the trained rival image nearly exclusively throughout 4-min viewing periods. This large change in binocular rivalry predominance was driven by two factors: task-independent, eye-specific changes in visual processing, as well as an enhanced ability of attention to promote predominance of the task-relevant stimulus. Notably, this strengthening of task-driven attention also exhibited eye specificity above and beyond that from observed sensory processing changes. These empirical results, along with simulations from a recently developed model of interocular suppression, reveal that stimulus predominance during binocular rivalry can be realized both through an eye-specific boost in processing of sensory information and through facilitated deployment of attention to taskrelevant features in the trained eye. Our findings highlight the interplay of attention and binocular rivalry at multiple visual processing stages and reveal that sustained training can substantially alter early visual mechanisms.visual attention | binocular rivalry | perceptual learning | visual plasticity F rom the earliest empirical reports of binocular rivalry (1), scientists have asked whether the fluctuating perceptual experience induced by presenting unmatched images to the two eyes ("binocular rivalry") could be willfully controlled by the observer. Despite early claims of nearly complete voluntary control (2), recent studies show that attention has only a modest selective impact during continuous viewing of binocular rivalry. Observers who are instructed to "hold" one of the two rival targets dominant exhibit relatively little influence over the dynamics of binocular rivalry (3). Rivalry becomes more susceptible to selective modulation under conditions that promote the deployment of attention to features present in only one of the two rivalry targets (4-7). However, compared with strong effects of visual attention on perception in other domains (8, 9), these effects are modest and suggest additional limiting conditions on attention's ability to influence perception during binocular rivalry (10). This is puzzling given that visual attention typically has its strongest effects in cases of visual competition (11), which notably include other, ostensibly related bistable stimuli [e.g., the Neck...

Persistent Biases in Binocular Rivalry Dynamics within the Visual Field

“…Under this scenario, because the factor of eye does persist over time, it suggests that this may be fundamental to the instigation of binocular rivalry, consistent with many previous results [20,21,22,23,24]. In support of this idea, recent evidence from perceptual learning paradigms indicates that the bulk of the changes to rivalry dynamics following training are specific to the trained eye rather than stimulus [19,48]. Taken together, our results do support the idea that “onset” rivalry is partially distinct from ongoing binocular rivalry dynamics [27], in that it is more susceptible to a larger host of factors that can influence perception than is prolonged viewing.…”

An algorithmic information theory of consciousness

“…According to KT, image training (prior model building) also leads to dominance (e.g. Dieter and Tadin 2016 ).…”

Attention periodically samples competing stimuli during binocular rivalry

“…Traditionally, top-down, voluntary attention has been thought to have limited control over perceptual dynamics during binocular rivalry; attention may alter dominance durations, but cannot halt the process of perceptual reversals entirely (Chong and Blake, 2006; Chong et al, 2005; Chopin and Mamassian, 2010; Dieter et al, 2016b; Dieter et al, 2015; Dieter et al, 2016b; Mitchell et al, 2004; Paffen and Alais, 2011; for bottom-up control, including crossmodal stimulation, see Conrad et al, 2010; Deroy et al, 2014; Guzman-Martinez et al, 2012; Kang and Blake, 2005; Lunghi and Alais, 2013; Lunghi et al, 2010; Lunghi et al, 2014; van Ee et al, 2009). Our results clearly show additional dependence on the top-down deployment of attention, as without explicit instruction to attend to crossmodal signals, no facilitatory crossmodal effects emerged (see also Jack and Hacker, 2014; Talsma et al, 2010; van Ee et al, 2009).…”